IBJNews

Governor keeping quiet on Indiana immigration bill

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels isn't saying how he feels about a proposal moving in the Legislature that would require police officers in the state to enforce federal immigration laws.

The sponsor of the bill approved Wednesday by a state Senate committee says it's aimed at having an Arizona-style crackdown on illegal immigration.

Daniels told reporters that he wasn't taking a public stance on the bill, saying its provisions were still in flux.

Supporters of the legislation say it's needed because the federal government has failed to enforce immigration laws and that states are forced to spend millions of dollars on providing health care, education and other services for illegal immigrants.

Opponents fear it could lead to racial profiling and cast the state as intolerant.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • immigration
    That's the truth and also these companies should also pay more an hour to attract more legal workers. Those businesses that hire the immigrants is because they are not willing to pay decent wages to citizens because they can employ illegal immigrants for a lot less wage. Most Americans can't live off minimum wage the cost of living is too high. I think we should consider cracking down on companies also from being unfair to citizen employees paying us ridiculous wages and work that's too hard for the wages they pay. If they want to control the illegal population they should focus on the criminals who are illegal that are in this country like rapists, murderers, and women and child abusers. But most illegal immigrants are law abiding well except the law of being here illegally. Its not their fault its their countries fault where they're from because they don't take care of their own citizens. If I was almost starving to death and live very poor and if the only chance I had I would also go to live in a country illegally to give my children and I. They are just taking care of their families the best way they can here since their countries don't care about their citizens. This country was built on immigrants so now why are we wanting to do a 360 and turning away immigrants. I think its hypocritical. Let's really think about a better way to control illegal immigrants by starting with the root of the problem like the corrupt businesses and make the these companies attract and hire more American citizens and legal immigrants. So that there is more jobs available for citizens and less illegal immigrants.
  • You have been brainwashed
    Your car is Japanese. Your vodka is Russian. Your pizza is Italian. Your kebab is Turkish. Your democracy is Greek. Your coffee is Brazilian. Your movies are American. Your tea is Tamil. Your shirt is Indian. Your oil is Saudi Arabian. Your electronics are Chinese. Your numbers Arabic, your letters Latin. And you complain that your neighbor is an immigrant? Pull yourself together!

    Racist tactics in an attempt to stop illegal immigration are morally reprehensible. The only appropriate measure to stop illegal immigration here in Indiana would be to actually enforce anti illegal worker laws against the un-American BUSINESSES who are creating the problem.

    We don't create jobs because illegal immigrants came here. Illegal immigrants came here because we are willing to give them a job. America offers them better opportunity as illegal immigrants than their own country can offer them as citizens. Change the incentive and fix the problem. Make business who hire illegal workers actually have to pay for their illegal practices. The fine must be higher than the benefit gained from illegal labor.

    If you cut off demand for illegal labor they will stop coming. It is that simple. While you might feel like you should punish the illegal immigrants, that is not a solution to the problem. More illegal immigrants will always come as long as corrupt businesses are willing to hire them.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT